Is there a Christian vote?

[Monarchist]

Family First will never run this country. They will never get enough of the votes to cause either of the two major parties much concern, what they can do is say we as a Christian party expect a standard A CHRISTIAN standard.
Why the Hate for the AOG church, I use to attend one, didnt see much wrong with it to me.
Surprisingly, someone stated that Hillsongs was untrustworthy, what? are the liberal/labor parties trustworthy? Are you gullible or something. Some of these Politicians are probably the most crooked people in society, now.

Yes We are a Pagan society and you are welcome to accept that. Christ told us to make a difference, I dont accept it.

Abortion for sick painfull babies. how can anybody know if a child is going to live a life sick ill or in pain when its in the Mothers womb.
Choice, Hypocrite. Where is that Babies CHOICE.
I cant understand how you can make that comment.

The general moral standard of this whole country from the TV screens to sporting heroes are nosediving and people accept this?

Luke warm Christianity.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

What about the fact that 50 000 people die each day due to poverty? Is that lukewarm Christianity?

 

[Monarchist]

What about the fact that 50 000 people die each day due to poverty? Is that lukewarm Christianity?

I cant see how Christians who are a minority, can help the poor without having a political influence.
Yes I give to charity on a regular basis. I would also think that the AOG and the Exclusive Brethren et all do more for charities, percentage wise than most other organisations.
Christianity is a minority. Feeding the world is going to take more than Christians to accomplish.
I see more being done by the church than any one else.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

More being done by the church? More being by the church?

This is the same church that has massive buildings in every continent of the world. This is the same church that clings onto tradition, and it's dear property for fear that it will not be the same without it's grand basilicas and buildings. This is the same church that owns an excessive amount of wealth. This is the same church that has its own state and government. This is the church that has deviated far from the gospel of Christ. If the church wanted to end poverty - it could do it.

You are wrong my friend, there are plenty of Christians who are doing there bit to help others in poverty. But the "Church" is doing nothing.

I can't see how poverty is not the biggest issue facing Christianity - how many times in the bible does God get angry at Israel for oppressing the weak? There are far more passages speaking of the poor then homosexuality.

It doesn't mean that other things are just as important - but making others conform on our stance on homosexuality, on abortion - does not bring them to Christ. If there's one group of people in this world that needs Christians right now - it's the poor. It's the oppressed. The Christian gospel is nothing, if it is not about the poor.

Feeding the world is going to take more than Christians yes - it's going to take Jesus, because no one else will, because no one else cares. Jesus came, and he came for those that needed his help. He came for the tax collectors, the prostitutes, the poor. This is still the same gospel, the same people. This is no different to 2000 years before. We supposedly have the Holy Spirit to lead us - but there are too many bogged down on religion, too many who miss what the gospel is about.

I have no doubt that there are many Christians that take this fight. But I have no doubt we are not doing enough. Why do I always hear declarations about homosexuality, abortion, but never anything about poverty?

Sorry I know you're only stating what you believe, and I don't think you said anything wrong, I'm just very frustrated with how much is "done" for the poor.

 

[tgg]

The Greens? Go read there policies.

• reduce greenhouse emissions by 30% by 2020 (80% by 2050)
• make workplaces fair and abolish WorkChoices
• bring Australian forces home from Iraq and Afghanistan
• build up public health services and include dental care
• keep uranium in the ground and Australia nuclear-free!

I definitely support all of these policies, and more.

 

[NavyGuy7]

If there is it has no influence since who would it vote for? Both Labor and Lib are both professedly christian. But really you imply that christians are one united force who agree on the same things which I don't think has been accurate since the 1st century. Lucky for us non-christians too since if chrisitans were united all the time you would always win with a 2/3 majority every election thus leaving little debate.

Maybe we should unite the Christians......

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

Unite the Christians... Bearing in mind that is what Jesus prayed for. Sounds like a brilliant idea...but in all honesty there will never be unity among the churches.

 

[Monarchist]

More being done by the church? More being by the church?

This is the same church that has massive buildings in every continent of the world. This is the same church that clings onto tradition, and it's dear property for fear that it will not be the same without it's grand basilicas and buildings. This is the same church that owns an excessive amount of wealth. This is the same church that has its own state and government. This is the church that has deviated far from the gospel of Christ. If the church wanted to end poverty - it could do it.

You are wrong my friend, there are plenty of Christians who are doing there bit to help others in poverty. But the "Church" is doing nothing.

I can't see how poverty is not the biggest issue facing Christianity - how many times in the bible does God get angry at Israel for oppressing the weak? There are far more passages speaking of the poor then homosexuality.

It doesn't mean that other things are just as important - but making others conform on our stance on homosexuality, on abortion - does not bring them to Christ. If there's one group of people in this world that needs Christians right now - it's the poor. It's the oppressed. The Christian gospel is nothing, if it is not about the poor.

Feeding the world is going to take more than Christians yes - it's going to take Jesus, because no one else will, because no one else cares. Jesus came, and he came for those that needed his help. He came for the tax collectors, the prostitutes, the poor. This is still the same gospel, the same people. This is no different to 2000 years before. We supposedly have the Holy Spirit to lead us - but there are too many bogged down on religion, too many who miss what the gospel is about.

I have no doubt that there are many Christians that take this fight. But I have no doubt we are not doing enough. Why do I always hear declarations about homosexuality, abortion, but never anything about poverty?

Sorry I know you're only stating what you believe, and I don't think you said anything wrong, I'm just very frustrated with how much is "done" for the poor.

I cant argue with any of that. All very fair comment. I wont argue that the Church should do more for the poor.
It should be the responsibility of the Church and here is the BUT, People are greedy and selfish. People have mortgages and children they worry for, people have to retire and support themselves in an ever growing expensive world.
There is only so much you want to do without jepordising your own future. One other thing, how much of my hard earned goes to admin and how much goes to helping.
But I cant argue with any of what you have said.

 

[tigercub]

If you want to give to a charity that gives 100% to the needy and admin is done voluntarily, try ADRA.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

More being done by the church? More being by the church?

This is the same church that has massive buildings in every continent of the world. This is the same church that clings onto tradition, and it's dear property for fear that it will not be the same without it's grand basilicas and buildings.

Though I agree with your sentiment - here's something to ponder. Most of those "grand basilicas and buildings" - at least in Australia, are essentially worthless.

If you don't believe me - try owning one.
Old buildings = lots of expensive maintenance. They also = heritage orders. Those two factors mean that even if the church wanted to sell them, or combine congregations and re-develop some of them (and believe me, they do), they can't, because no-one will buy a run-down, heritage-listed building that they can't develop.

Want to help the poor and take away excuses ? - fire the heritage architects from local government.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

I heard a story about how a builder who had done the whole conversion thing offered his bishop to take out some of the glass windows of the basilica and stuff and sell them and replace them with replicas and to give the profit to the needy. Met with shock and disbelief that it was even suggested.

My favourite passages in the bible are when Jesus feeds the 5000 followed by the 4000 (or is it the other way around) The disciples are like - we should send these people away, because it would be impossible for us to feed them. Jesus says - you feed them. They come back and say they've only got 5 loaves of bread and two fish. So Jesus says give them to me. And he provides so that all are fed with plenty left over. To reinforce his point he does it twice. Yet the disciples still don't get it. They are on a boat with Jesus, and (I think the story is in Luke) it says very clearly in the passage (that is the narration of Luke) that there is a loaf of bread on the boat, but it records that the disciples are wondering if Jesus is angry with them because they have no bread.

But Luke and Jesus is trying to reinforce that there is only one bread we need in our lives - that being Jesus himself. I don't see a focus of many churches as helping the needy. It's true that we mightn't have the resources available - but God doesn't need us to have the resources. He calls us to give him what we've got, and he'll do the rest.

The church doesn't need big basilicas our buildings - it doesn't need authentic welsh services in Melbourne. (not picking on the welsh, just the example I know of, I'm sure there are plenty others) It doesn't need any of these things. What it needs is more Christians willing to give their lives and make their lives available to God.

 

[norbie]

In answer to your question - no I wouldn't. I don't deny other people the right to do this though.

I have heard situations where people considered abortion due to the likelihood of defects, but the child ended up being born with no defects.

And this is the right way to think like Dear Neenie: we have no right to force our believe on the majority of unbelievers in this country of ours - BUT the problem clearly is that the churches don't do their job: to promote our believe. But FF is wrong and I would never vote for it.

 

[Neenie1]

Norbie I do not agree that FF is wrong. I am tempted to vote for it,

I would vote for them because they make a stand for Christian beliefs.

Whereas the other political parties make a stand for the beliefs of the world.

That is why I would vote for FF. I am tempted but I don't know if I will.

I don't agree with everything they say or do, but then I don't agree with everything the Labour/Liberal parties do either.

In fact I can't find a political party that I agree with 100%. I think the trick is finding one that you agree with at least some of their policies and vote for that one.

 

[GodsoldierClintus]

hmmm I see where you're coming from Neenie. But the focus of our beliefs is Christ - from looking at the family first website I don't get the feel they are Christians. Is there actually point imposing the way we live on others - when the centre of that message is left out?

 

[John Spong is wrong]

Norbie I do not agree that FF is wrong. I am tempted to vote for it,

I would vote for them because they make a stand for Christian beliefs.

Whereas the other political parties make a stand for the beliefs of the world.

That is why I would vote for FF. I am tempted but I don't know if I will.

I don't agree with everything they say or do, but then I don't agree with everything the Labour/Liberal parties do either.

In fact I can't find a political party that I agree with 100%. I think the trick is finding one that you agree with at least some of their policies and vote for that one.

I hope you succumb to the temptation!

 

[John Spong is wrong]

More being done by the church? More being by the church?

Why do I always hear declarations about homosexuality, abortion, but never anything about poverty?

You've hit the nail on the head my friend.

 

[John Spong is wrong]

So it's a complete coincidence that Andrew Evans was the head of the AOG church and then started the Family First Party? *cough* *splutter* must be a coincidence *cough*

You found more than one member of FF who is not a member of AOG? Last election something like 80% of them were...

I refuse to aid the AOG/Hillsong (same leader = same thing) in gaining any political power. Hillsong has already proven themsleves untrustworthy with taxpayers money, let's not give them a whole lot more.

Would you abort a fetus with a serious life-long disease/impairment that would mean constant pain? Well if Family First get in, you won't have the choice! How wonderfully Christian is that - the removal of choice.

Your views on abortion are astonishing - and disappointing - but this topic would require a different board (let alone a different thread). It's a topic that I don't really care to discuss - having seen how the US-based pro-abortion Roe vs Wade-loving crowd behave and having experienced the 'intelligence' of their arguments (which are lower than my 4 year old nephew's).

"I refuse to aid the AOG/Hillsong (same leader = same thing) in gaining any political power" - gee, that's a big call TigerCub. Although I must admit I've wrestled with this issue myself. But I believe that Hillsong are more closely aligned with the Liberal Party at this point in time. I don't have a problem with FF being mainly an AOG-based, member-driven Party. It's not like they actively exclude other churches (as I said, just look at who sits on their Board).

I don't have a problem with FF being AOG per se although I admit I'd like to see them be more of a (literally) 'broad church'. Still, I'm happy as a FF member . . . unless you see something sinister in the AOG denomination? I could argue on but I suspect that, given your views on abortion, the Australian Democrats are about as far to the 'right' as you'd identify yourself politically.

 

[Neenie1]

hmmm I see where you're coming from Neenie. But the focus of our beliefs is Christ - from looking at the family first website I don't get the feel they are Christians. Is there actually point imposing the way we live on others - when the centre of that message is left out?

Yes the focus of our beliefs is Christ, and I want to vote for someone who best represents that.

Have you got a link for the FF website? I wouldn't mind having a sticky beak to see if I get what you mean.

I don't believe in imposing the way I live on others so much as I want the freedom for my children and I to live the way we choose to live.

 

[tigercub]

The only information you will find on their website is what they want you to know.

For instance; the Socialist Alliance party looks fine and dandy on paper, dig a little deeper; and they are extremists who want everything to be owned by the Government (them).

To really find out about them (like the policies not listed) I suggest you do a little Googling .

 

[norbie]

It's quite sad that Senator Barnabie is under the National power. But he would be a good, Christian Independent Senator.